Toronto206

Seattle NHL Brand Discussion

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

Per my girlfriend, an IP paralegal:

 

You can't trademark a color scheme, in and of itself, but similar or identical colors add fuel to the fire if you want to bring a case based on brand confusion. If you intend on using similar schemes, with the explanation you want to give the city's teams a unifying theme, it's best to get a courtesy approval from the established brands, to avoid future headaches.

 

UPDATE: she did mention that you can protect a color package, but that actually has more to do with what you name the colors.

 

You can trademark colors and color scheme so long as that color(s) has achieved secondary meaning in the market. The seminal Supreme Court case on this is Qualitex v. Jacobson (514 U.S. 159 (1995)), which holds that "color alone, at least sometimes, can meet the basic legal requirements for use as a trademark. It can act as a symbol that distinguishes a firm's goods and identifies their source, without serving any other significant function." Id. at 166. It doesn't matter what you call the colors, but to be protected, the color has have become uniquely identified with the product or service. Examples would include use for brown in shipping (UPS) and magenta in cellular service (T-Mobile).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2017 at 11:48 AM, Ice_Cap said:

It would depend. I get the feeling that the NHL/New Jersey Devils let their claim on the "Colorado Rockies" name lapse or otherwise chose not to challenge the baseball team's use of it. Which effectively would have transfered the rights to the name to the baseball team anyway.

 

I'm not sure what the status of the Seattle Pilots name is, but it's possible that MLB still holds a trademark on it. Didn't the Mariners wear Pilots throwbacks not too long ago?

 

They have, back in 2006.1 The Brewers have worn Pilots throwbacks twice, once in 1999 (as the regular Pilots) and again in 2000 (as the "Spring Training" Pilots).2

 

ichiro110804b.jpgbrewers-pilots-throwback.jpg.a4e85f842413cf6e889bea494702e7c6.jpg19487079801_0fd3bf00e8_b.jpg

 

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think that MLB Properties owns the trademarks for many of the defunct teams (i.e. Seattle Pilots, Washington Senators MK. I and II, etc.). That's how these throwback games happen with little issue.

 

1William F. Henderson, Game Worn Guide to Mlb Jerseys: (1970–2015) Seventh Edition (Philadelphia, PA: Aardvark Publishing, 2015), 1384.

2Ibid, 793, 795.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2017 at 5:25 PM, Mingjai said:

 

You can trademark colors and color scheme so long as that color(s) has achieved secondary meaning in the market. The seminal Supreme Court case on this is Qualitex v. Jacobson (514 U.S. 159 (1995)), which holds that "color alone, at least sometimes, can meet the basic legal requirements for use as a trademark. It can act as a symbol that distinguishes a firm's goods and identifies their source, without serving any other significant function." Id. at 166. It doesn't matter what you call the colors, but to be protected, the color has have become uniquely identified with the product or service. Examples would include use for brown in shipping (UPS) and magenta in cellular service (T-Mobile).

I checked with her and she confirmed this. She clarified that she thought I was asking about sports franchising, specifically (which I was). Her firm has now handled four sports brandings, all college and minor leagues.

 

Regarding color alone in general, she said: "While it is possible, the trademarking of color, alone is generally a pointless endeavor 95% of the time. In order to have branded in such a way that your business colors are intrinsically linked with your brand, in the public's mind-eye, you are probably large enough and have far-reaching enough trademarks, that the use of said color is thoroughly covered, by that point. In cases where you are arguing brand confusion over color, alone, your case has to be pretty air tight. Even a small difference in hue can be enough differentiation to prevent a ruling in your favor."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2017 at 8:40 AM, webdav said:

"Rattle City" is a nickname for Seattle

 

I've lived in Seattle 31 years and I've literally never heard this. Emerald City, Jet City, or Rain City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me Metropolitans is a no brainer. History with the city and league. Much like the Sounders in soccer, albeit much more distant but the same idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TaylorMade said:

 

I've lived in Seattle 31 years and I've literally never heard this. Emerald City, Jet City, or Rain City.

 

I've heard Rat City, but mostly in relation to the Roller Girls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

 

I've heard Rat City, but mostly in relation to the Roller Girls.

And, at least as far as I have heard, Rat City is more localized to White Center.

 

Edit: Queen City was also an official nickname for Seattle for a long time. Seattle Monarchs isn't bad although way too close to the LA Kings to be seriously considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rain City Golden Seals

 

Srsly though, Metropolitans wouldn't fly with it already a division name.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 2001mark said:

Rain City Golden Seals

 

Srsly though, Metropolitans wouldn't fly with it already a division name.

 

that still shouldn't restrict a historically important name.  it would be a great way to inform the younger generation of hockey fans about the very first American team to win the Stanley Cup, and now the new team bears the moniker to carry on that legacy for the city of Seattle.  Or whatever marketing nonsense spin that needs to be put. 

 

But in all honesty, a division name that's only existed since 2013 shouldn't supersede a legacy that was over 100 years ago.  I don't recall a major anti-Nationals stance when the Expos moved.  (Although a certain Independent Washington Baseball person could say otherwise).  Yes the Senators name was expected due to the same historical backstory for the city.  But Nationals was also a historically relevant name to the city and the sport.

 

I'm sure it can keep going.  The Rochester Americans in the American Hockey League. The Quebec Nordiques (Northerners/Northmen) in the Northeast Division. 

 

If anything, I'm shocked this hasn't started a campaign to bring back the Norris/Smythe/Patrick/Adams names and remove obscure geographic references (cause really? Columbus is considered Metropolitan?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle Shotgunners

 

Faux plaid flannel sweater/jersey(color doesn't matter)

Faux denim pants(blue)

 

 

/badtaste

/stilltoosoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Pharos04 said:

it would be a great way to inform every generation of hockey fans still living about the very first American team to win the Stanley Cup, and now the new team bears the moniker to carry on that legacy for the city of Seattle.  Or whatever marketing nonsense spin that needs to be put. 

 

FTFY.

 

Metropolitans only works if every other nickname is terrible.  Seattle is a modern city, not a "let's pretend we're kinda/sorta connected to a team from 100 years ago" city.

 

It'd be better to have a "Metropolitans Appreciation Night" every year rather than use the name full time.  Just take the way the Leafs honor the St. Pats, but do it every year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason Metropolitans should even be given a second thought is because the Pacific Northwest has a reputation for hipsters. Every small batch artisanal beard oil features a logo using aesthetics from the WW1 era... So I could see Seattle or Portland going that route.

 

But that doesn't mean it isn't an awful name. Literally the only way to make it work would be to completely embrace a retro angle. Not a "this brand was gold 100 years ago and it will be gold 100 years in the future" like the Habs or Yankees... but a pure "this team is based on the early 1900s" identity. If they jump in to that tiny niche with both feet, I'd probably like them more than the Vegas golden knights, if we're being honest. Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ColeJ said:

The only reason Metropolitans should even be given a second thought is because the Pacific Northwest has a reputation for hipsters. Every small batch artisanal beard oil features a logo using aesthetics from the WW1 era... So I could see Seattle or Portland going that route.

 

But that doesn't mean it isn't an awful name. Literally the only way to make it work would be to completely embrace a retro angle. Not a "this brand was gold 100 years ago and it will be gold 100 years in the future" like the Habs or Yankees... but a pure "this team is based on the early 1900s" identity. If they jump in to that tiny niche with both feet, I'd probably like them more than the Vegas golden knights, if we're being honest. Lol.

....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

....I'm down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love marine animals for hockey teams, so Seals or Sea Lions would be a fantastic name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rebuy said:

I love marine animals for hockey teams, so Seals or Sea Lions would be a fantastic name.

Time to bring this name and logo back.

SeaDogsLogo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Rebuy said:

I love marine animals for hockey teams, so Seals or Sea Lions would be a fantastic name.

 

I do too. I love the Seals as a nickname. But, I'm not sure if I like how the Seattle Seals or Seattle Sea Lions roll off the tongue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2017 at 9:44 PM, BeaverSports said:

How about Seattle Cranes? You can tap into the Frasier fan base and probably make a cool logo with it. 

 

On 4/19/2017 at 10:11 PM, Walter Sobchak said:

The Seattle Cranes with Kelsey Grammer's face as the logo.

 

 

Seattle Bulldogs.

 

Image result for bulldog frasier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

 

 

Seattle Bulldogs.

 

Image result for bulldog frasier

 

Brilliant!

 

Save the Cranes name for basketball since cranes are rather lanky creatures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To maintain the theme . . . the Seattle Martins (since martins are actually a thing).

 

latest?cb=20130329121735Purple%20Martin%20s60-5-005_V.jpg?itok=d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kimball said:

 

I do too. I love the Seals as a nickname. But, I'm not sure if I like how the Seattle Seals or Seattle Sea Lions roll off the tongue?

Seattle Sea Lions is kind of cool. Similar to Seahawks and Sea Lions are ever present eating salmon at the Ballard Locks in Seattle. 

 

sea-lion-eating-salmon.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.